Jun 13, 2008 - Reactivity Requirements with Analysis & Testing of Hydrogen ... Quantify the DOE On-Board Storage Safety Target: âMeets or .... m/s-bar 500.
Quantifying & Addressing the DOE Material Reactivity Requirements with Analysis & Testing of Hydrogen Storage Materials & Systems D. Mosher, J. Khalil, X. Tang, B. Laube and R. Brown United Technologies Research Center J. Senecal and Kemi Sorinmade Kidde-Fenwal
Annual Peer Review Arlington, VA June 13, 2008
Project ID ST41
This presentation does not contain any proprietary, confidential, or otherwise restricted information
Overview Timeline
Official Start: June 2007 Contract Signed: August 2007 End: May 2010 Percent complete: 25%
Budget $1.34M Total Program $1.07M DOE $0.27M UTRC
FY07: $60k FY08: $410k
Barriers F. Codes & Standards A. System Weight & Volume
Target EH&S: “Meets or exceeds applicable standards”
Partners & Collaborators Project UTRC Kidde-Fenwal DOE Core Team Savannah River NL Sandia NL IEA / IPHE Additional Team Members FZK (Germany) AIST (Japan) UQTR (Canada) Canadian SDTC Project HSM, Inc. led alane system development UTRC - alane system reactivity evaluation Additional Collaborations DOE refueling station risk assessment IEA Task 19 NFPA Hydrogen Technology Committee, C&S activities 2
Broad Objectives Quantify the DOE On-Board Storage Safety Target: “Meets or exceeds applicable standards.” Evaluate reactivity of key materials under development in the materials Centers of Excellence. Establish generalized and specific risk analyses between reaction characteristics and satisfaction of acceptance criteria. Reduce reactivity consequences of candidate materials and systems through development of mitigation methods. Determine the trade-offs between performance and residual risk. Support risk informed choices for Codes & Standards activities.
3
Approach: Tasks & Materials Underlined items are covered in the current presentation Primary Tasks
Risk Analysis Framework Material testing – Dust Explosion Reaction kinetics experiments – Air Exposure: Time Resolved XRD Risk mitigation Prototype implementation
Four Material Candidates:
2LiBH4 + MgH2 AlH3 NH3BH3 Activated carbon
Conditions:
Charged & discharged As-synthesized and after reaction cycling Without and with hydrogen Pure & after exposure to contaminants Before and after mitigation
4
Coordination of Multi-project Partners Current DOE & IEA/IPHE Task Matrix
UTRC Task # 1.0 2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
5
Approach: Activity Relationships Detailed Testing and Modeling will supplement the Risk Analysis Framework to serve as the basis for risk informed reactivity and C&S decisions. Codes & Standards
DOE Safety Target / Systems Analysis
Risk Analysis Framework (Qualitative & Quantitative)
Expert Panel
Materials Tests
Modeling
Mitigation
Chemical Kinetics Prototype Testing 6
FY07 & FY08 Milestones Milestones FY08 Q1
Develop qualitative risk analysis to select highest risks for Material #1.
FY08 Q2
Perform dust explosion tests for Material #1.
FY08 Q2
Conduct time resolved XRD for air exposure of Material #1.
FY08 Q3
Implement enhancements to dust explosion and gas exposure reactivity testing.
FY08 Q4
Perform qualitative risk analysis for top three materials.
FY08 Q4
Complete enhanced gas reactivity testing for Material #1.
FY08 Q4
Complete dust explosion tests for Material #2.
7
Risk Analysis Framework
Risk Analysis Overview Qualitative – Broad Scope
Quantitative – Key Risks
Expert panel Material test data Modeling Mitigation strategies Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) Standard approach for Automotive Industry and Consumer Products
Potential deviations from normal operating conditions (ex. vehicle operation)
Fault Tree Analysis (FTA)
Event Tree Analysis (ETA)
Standard approach used by Nuclear Power Industry & NASA
Hazard and Operability Analysis (HAZOP) Standard approach for the Chemical Industry
FTA/ETA Linking
Consequences Recommendations for Engineered Safety Features
Quantified Accident Sequences
Accident scenario development Uncertainty analysis Parameter sensitivity studies
CAFTA U.S. NRC / INL
8
Risk Analysis Framework
rin g kS co Ris
on tro ls nt C rre Cu
ot Ca us e Ro
de Mo Fa ilur e
Co
mp
on en t
FMEA Spreadsheet
Initial assessment based on NaAlH4 material and system due to existing knowledge – applicable to other onboard reversible materials. Risk Priority Number = Consequence * Probability * (lack of) Detectability Acceptable / threshold risk: RPNth = 80 9
Risk Analysis Framework
Mu lt Ac i-Pro tio jec ns t
Ot Impa he ct r T on arg ets
vis ed Sc ori ng Re
Ad dit ion al C
on tro ls
FMEA Spreadsheet
If RPN > RPNth, develop recommended actions which include Mitigation Development and Uncertainty Reduction (additional testing/modeling). Interpret mitigation Feasibility not as cost, but Technology Readiness Level (TRL). Examine impact on non-safety Technical Targets (weight, volume, …). Customized FMEA framework developed for on-board reversible hydrides. Population of entries by the multi-project team will be on-going. 10
Risk Analysis Framework
Quantitative Analysis: ETA / FTA Event Tree (ET) describes accident progression from initiating event to end states. The CAFTA computer program is being employed; can be exported to SAPHIRE. The probability assigned to each node will be estimated from a fault tree analysis (FTA), experiments / modeling, or expert judgment.
Vehicle Collision (VC): initiating event
Water contact with hydride
Sequence of outcomes or end states (consequence severity)
Probability of water contact given prior events 11
Dust Explosion
Materials Testing: Dust Explosion Measurements (ASTM test) Pmax, (dP/Dt)max, Kst (E1226) Minimum Explosive Concentration (E1515) Minimum Ignition Energy (E2019) Minimum Ignition Temperature (E1491)
Standard 20 L Kühner apparatus (E1226 & E1515)
Future variation from conventional ASTM procedures Relative humidity monitored only ⇒ control RH. Perform tests with hydrogen / oxygen gas mixtures. Vary ignition delay – affect turbulence level. Additional diagnostics for heat flux, turbulence, ...
12
Dust Explosion
2LiBH4 + MgH2: Hydrided State Ball Milled, Hydrided State
Sieve Analysis > 40 mesh (425 μm)
5.9%
> 70 mesh (212 μm)
20.8%
> 100 mesh (150 μm)
12.6%
> 200 mesh (75 μm)
2LiBH4 + MgH2
NaAlH4 [2]
Lyco. Spores
PMAX, bar-g
10.7
11.9
7.4
21.8%
(dP/dt)MAX, bar/s
2036
3202
511
> 400 mesh (37 μm)
9.6%
KST, bar-m/s
553 [1]
869
139
< 400 mesh (37 μm)
29.3%
Dust Class
St-3
St-3
St-1
Min. Explosive Conc. (MEC), g/m3
30
140
30
TC, °C
150
137
430
Min. Ignition Energy (MIE), mJ
